13.07.2015 Views

The Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project in Chicago

The Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project in Chicago

The Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project in Chicago

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

territory), there was no longer a significant difference between respondents <strong>in</strong> the two areas.Both communities reflected decreases <strong>in</strong> the proportions mention<strong>in</strong>g alcohol-related problems,but the decrease was statistically significant between Time I and Time II <strong>in</strong> Lat<strong>in</strong> K<strong>in</strong>g territoryonly. <strong>The</strong>re was a significant <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> Lat<strong>in</strong> K<strong>in</strong>g territory <strong>in</strong> the perception of unemploymentas a problem – from 1.7% to 11.7% (p # 0.05), but a non-significant decrease <strong>in</strong> Two Sixterritory – from 11.1% to 5.9%.<strong>The</strong> same types of pattern changes were apparent <strong>in</strong> another set of questions regard<strong>in</strong>gconcerns about family members be<strong>in</strong>g victims of crime <strong>in</strong> the com<strong>in</strong>g year. At Time II, a smallerproportion of respondents <strong>in</strong> both territories was very worried about family members be<strong>in</strong>gvictimized, but the decl<strong>in</strong>e was slightly greater and of higher statistical significance <strong>in</strong> Lat<strong>in</strong>K<strong>in</strong>g territory than <strong>in</strong> Two Six territory (Chisquare = 19.480, df = 1, p # 0.001 versus Chisquare= 7.968, df = 1, p # 0.01). Further, the decl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> the proportion of respondents who said theywere afraid to walk alone <strong>in</strong> areas close to their homes was much greater <strong>in</strong> Lat<strong>in</strong> K<strong>in</strong>g territorythan <strong>in</strong> Two Six territory. <strong>The</strong> proportion of concerned Lat<strong>in</strong> K<strong>in</strong>g-territory respondents droppedby almost half between Time I and Time II – from 95.0% to 50.8% – and was of high statisticalsignificance (Chisquare = 29.767, df = 1, p # 0.001).A decrease <strong>in</strong> the proportion of respondents who reported that they or their familymembers were victims of some type of crime <strong>in</strong> the previous six months was much greater <strong>in</strong> TwoSix territory than <strong>in</strong> Lat<strong>in</strong> K<strong>in</strong>g territory. At Time I, almost all residents <strong>in</strong>terviewed <strong>in</strong> Two Sixterritory reported that they or a family member had been a victim – 91.7%, compared to 61.7%<strong>in</strong> Lat<strong>in</strong> K<strong>in</strong>g territory. This difference was statistically significant (Chisquare = 10.254, df = 1,p # 0.01). At Time II, the proportion of respondents who were victims had decreased to 47.2%16.16

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!